Christian Authority

Monday, June 27 In the year of our Lord 2011
My House, Caronport Saskatchewan
Contemplating Ecclesiological / Eschatological / Christological concepts in relation to authority within the Christian Church... (relaxing after work / making supper) 7:16 PM
Weather = very pleasant


Authority. Where do Christians find it? What authority do we live by and where or what do we get authority?

Well, being a good Protestant / Evangelical / Baptist we will start with Scripture. The Bible is the source of authority that all of us good Evangelicals hail as the divine law and ultimate authority for the Christian and the Church. Indeed, the divinely inspired Scriptures of The Bible are the foundations for Christian conduct and the source of God's Word to us. As the Scriptures say;

All Scripture is God-breathed and is useful for teaching, rebuking, correcting and training in righteousness, 2 Timothy 3:16

Do not conform to the pattern of this world, but be transformed by the renewing of your mind. Then you will be able to test and approve what God’s will is—his good, pleasing and perfect will. Romans 12:2

For the conservative Evangelical, The Bible is the highest law. But this makes me ask the question, "why don't we follow it?"

If Christian authority were as simple as saying "The Bible says..." then why don't we stone homosexuals, stop women from wearing jewelry, or sell all our possessions and give them to the poor?

The answer is that the Bible needs to be properly interpreted otherwise it can say whatever you want it to say. So perhaps the Bible alone isn't the sole authority for authentic Christian life, we also need to use sound thinking.

Reason, the ability to discern truth and understand reality by the power of our minds. The ancient Greeks hailed reason as a religion and the Enlightenment hailed Reason as god. From reason we have the Philosophy, the love of wisdom. Christians however acknowledge reason as a gift of God for the discernment of truth and the enabling of wisdom. Many church fathers acknowledged an eternal rational within nature, human thought, and even within the being of God himself! So we reason about the Bible and discern what parts of the Bible are applicable for us today.

For this reason all of what can be considered 'Classical Christianity' has done away with the sacrificing of animals on the rational that Jesus blood is our sin sacrifice. Christians don't follow the ancient Jewish Law given by Moses because of the decision of the original Church leaders who rationalized that since the Holy Spirit has come upon the Gentiles just like it came upon the Jews, that God accepted them as they were and that they did not need to follow The Law but should still adhere to some basic rules so as to not create strife between the Jewish and Gentile Christians. The Judaisers (those who demanded that Gentile Christians adhere to the Law) were the first heretical movement in the church and it was reason applied to Scripture which stopped them.

And so we have the entire field of Exegesis (properly understanding Scripture on its own terms) which is taught in every Christian School which seeks to be obedient to God. Within Exegesis we have many sub-categories that we use to discern the meaning within Scripture, and here is where Christians will differ in opinion about how this should be done. We have the Historical Critical method, Narrative method, Redactical method, and a whole host of other methods that will bore the average human being to death, but each are very important and form the rational behind different views of Scripture. Is the creation story literal or metaphor? Did Jesus actually do literal miracles or is it all narrative pointing towards a larger and more important truth? Is the proper interpretation of the Book of Revelation Pre-Trib, Post-Trib, Millennial, or Amillennial?

To be completely honest, I don't see most Christians looking into the discipline of applying reason to Scripture which means that we have another form of authority at play, Tradition!

The average person doesn't actually consider the reasoning behind what they believe, they just believe it on the basis of authority. I'm not just talking about religion now, I'm talking about everything. All of us adhere to different traditions of how to understand the world.

The weight of tradition can not be overemphasized and the authority found in it is staggering, especially in the Christian faith. It was tradition which allowed for the discerning of heresy in the early church and it was tradition which eventually allowed for the crafting of the entire New Testament! The Tradition of Truth, handled from Jesus to the Apostles to the disciples of the Apostles is the foundation of the Gospel message and the doctrines of the Church from the Apostles Creed to all the doctrines. As Christianity continued on its way through history it built upon the reasoning and discernment of the generation before it. It is this faithful tradition which has kept this religion firm against the attacks of corrupting the original message of Christ (as the Mormons and Muslims see it). It was this tradition which stopped the spread of Gnosticism in the second century and it is the this tradition that defines orthodox Christianity.

In an immediate sense the average Christian is part of a branch of this tradition that shapes how he or she understands The Bible, God, Salvation, the Church, the purpose Christianity itself, and so many other things as well. Instead of doing personal exegesis, most Christians rely on the authority of tradition. Even those that do learn how to do proper exegesis rely heavily on tradition, it is what gives us roots and identity. In an even more immediate sense every church has traditions from how many hymns or choruses must be sung to emphasizing specific doctrines (perhaps an emphasis on the sovereignty of God verses the free will of man).

Now if you happen to be reading this and something really ins't lining up just yet then perhaps that's because I haven't mentioned The Authority of The Spirit.

Christianity isn't just properly understanding Scripture and a Tradition of Truth, it is also empowered by The Holy Spirit! Christianity is a living religion and the Holy Spirit is what unifies us all in Christ as well as empowers and inspires individuals do the will of God. When The Holy Spirit came upon the Apostles it burned within them and they could not keep silent, even when the Sanhedrin (the highest religious authority during the time of Christ) forbid them from speaking, they literally could not stop, the Holy Spirit surged through them. All throughout history the Holy Spirit has empowered Christians, sometimes overtaking them in incredible ecstasy and revealing truth to the hearts of all who would listen. How did the Apostles know that Jesus was the Christ, the incarnation of God Himself? God revealed it to them, through the Holy Spirit!

Now going back to reason, it is important to note that authentic revelation of God will not contradict past revelation because God will not contradict himself. For this reason simply saying "God told me so," sometimes isn't the most authoritative thing to claim. Scripture, reason, and tradition all tell us to test the spirits to make sure that perceived divine revelation is in fact from God and not just someone's idea that they got really excited about.

That being said, the place and authority of revelation from God apart from Scripture (in personal experience) can not be overstated! Christianity would be dead if it weren't for the life breathed into each of us by God. The supernatural testimony of the Apostles, the Scriptures themselves, and the incredible witness of countless Spirit filled leaders from Scripture and beyond (Augustine, Luther, Calvin, Barth just to name a few from theology alone). This is the legacy of Christianity, the declaration of the Gospel! God is with us! Emmanuel! Hallelujah!

Even today, God manifests his power through us in Spiritual Gifts! The gift of wisdom where God gives you the ability to understand many things and how to apply knowledge well. The gift of knowledge where God allows you to know things that nobody has told you (yet). The gift of prophecy, where as you speak the truth about God, God himself speaks through you to enliven the soul of those listening. The gift of tongues where the spirit of the individual is caught up in the rapture of God's glory and begins to praise God in spiritual languages or where the language barrier is breached and the Christian is empowered to speak the language of the hearer. In addition to these are the gifts of teaching, administration, charity, faith, mercy, and hospitality.

Occasionally God will give some individuals a special anointing to do incredible things for the Kingdom of God. Luther's corrective to dead Catholicism, Barth's corrective to dead Protestantism, Martin Luther King Jr.'s corrective to a racist and hateful Christianity, Teresa of Calcutta's ministry to a poverty stricken land. Occasionally the Holy Spirit is poured out like wildfire upon an entire region for a time of incredible revival. It is from these people and times that traditions are formed and the authority of Spirit is remembered in those traditions. All these authorities are part of the grand story of God's working in history apart from as well as in and through his people.

Then of course there is always culture. Since the Church is located in time and space it is also located within a local culture. Local culture will have its own ideas and traditions, and is a natural catalyst for development and adaptation of the local church. Culture always demands that the church change, and the church must always walk the line between holding to what is true and updating what is out of style / irrelevant / wrong. The Church should be a notable presence within culture, following Jesus' command to be salt and light. The Church will also always be changing because of culture, both to combat as well as accommodate it.

This is why the Historical Critical method of understanding the Bible can not just be ignored, the Christians within Scripture were also shaped by and engaging in (reacting to?) the culture around them. Culture is the medium we live in, it is a part of who we are and who we are trying to reach.

Why then do Christians differ so much from each other? Why are there so many disagreements and schisms within the Church?

The reason I think is that we all place a different emphasis on different authorities. We Evangelicals (especially us Baptists) hold that Scripture is the highest authority, Scripture as the Holy Spirit empowers you to understand it. Roman Catholics value tradition, especially Peter's mantle to lead the Church, as the foundation of their structure and belief. Liberal Protestants (as well as liberal Catholics) emphasize historical criticism and reason based on the human experience. Pentecostals, Apostolics, as well a host of other mystical and spirit lead groups emphasize the authority of the working of the Holy Spirit and personal revelation. Independent churches place the authority of Scripture or the Holy Spirit above that of Tradition. Liberation and 'Social Gospel' movements within Christianity emphasize the importance of culture and our need to engage it. At the end of the day we all have the same authorities, but we just put them in different places.

I think that this difference in emphasizing of authority is actually a good thing. The Body of Christ (the Church) is a made up of many members, and I don't think the spirit of this analogy is lost when applying it to different streams within Christian thought. In this way the Church, like the Apostle Paul, becomes all things to all people so that some may be saved.

I think that there is a danger neglecting any one of these authorities. Christianity without the witness of Scripture risks toppling into foolish or false ideas that are in not part of Christianity at all. Christianity without reason is unintelligible / foolish / dogmatic at best and leads to some of the absolutely worst atrocities at worst. Christianity without Tradition risks corruption and has no accountability within the larger body of Christianity. Christianity without the Holy Spirit becomes dead religion, the very thing that Jesus condemned in the Pharisaical tradition. Christianity detached from culture becomes stagnant and begins to die.

All these forms of authority interweave with one another and we can not truly ignore any one of them. These are the forces that shape us which we engage in.

Greg Out

Thoughts on Assassin's Creed

Sunday, June 26 In the year of our Lord 2011

My House, Caronport Saskatchewan

Recovering from lots of people at my house, 4:30 PM

Weather = Sunny then Stormy then Sunny again... Bipolar?

Thoughts on Assassin's Creed

On November 13, 2007 a game was released that would become a legend. In both game play mechanic and in philosophical and theological voice, Assassin's Creed stands as the first of its kind. As a gamer, story line junky, and student of Theology I am particularly interested in how this series has handled both aspects.

I am particularly interested in the overwhelming theological and philosophical themes presented in the game, especially with the announcement of there newest release, Assassin's Creed Revelations.

PC Games - E3 2011 - Assassin's Creed: Revelations

Am I almost at a loss as to where to begin! As I listen to the sound track from Assassin's Creed 2 I can not but help remember feeling that in playing this game I was in some way participating in an epic story, so much bigger than myself. I suppose I'll start where my non-gaming readers get an introduction.

Click play to get some background music going and it will set the mood as you read. :)

Assassin's Creed was the first epic 'sandbox game' where the world is completely open and you can do whatever you feel like. Your character, Desmond Miles, was abducted by a group of scientists called Abstergo and put into a machine that allows Desmond to relive the memories of his ancestors. Desmond agrees to 'go back in time' through his ancestor's memories to help Abstergo find an important relic that they are looking for and in exchange they'll let him go home. As Desmond re-lives the memories of Altiar, an assassin from the Holy Land during the Crusades he makes many unsettling discoveries... The story line goes on an on going deeper and deeper and I just can't bear to try to type it all out without making it sound ridiculous. Needless to say I have been very impressed by the story telling.

I could go on about how the game play is innovative, the story depth, the emotion of the broad sweeping music of Assassin's Creed 2 and Brotherhood, the awesome fight scenes and so on and so forth, but that's not really what I wanted to write about.

What I want to write about are the messages inherent in this game, because they are profound.

First of all I find it interesting that at the beginning of each game in this series there is a loading screen that informs you that this game was created by a multi-faith team. Given the amount of Biblical and other religious content as well as the big questions posed this becomes obvious quickly.

While you play Desmond Miles your character is strapped into a machine for 97% of the game and you are actually playing his ancestors, Altiar from the Holy Land in 1170 and Ezio from Florence in the 1500's. This group of Assassin's fight for freedom and against corruption. When the cause of corruption is located an Assassin will go and assassinate the cause.

Their creed is simple, "Nothing is True, Everything is Permitted." At first I thought that this meant some sort of complete relativism which is so prevalent in our age and a very popular message of the time. The main character of Assassin's Creed 1 (Altiar) acts according the creed in exactly this way until he is chastised for his carelessness and foolish behavior by his peers as well as their leader. He is sent on a journey of redemption to prove his loyalty as well as to teach him the true meaning of the creed. However, what begins as a lesson in humility begins to descend into the uncovering of incredible and terrible secrets. Altiar finds a link between all the men he has been assigned to assassinate (be they Crusader or Islamic), all of them are part of a secret organization of Templars that are trying to bring about peace by destroying opposition, knowledge, and free will.

The leader of the Assassin's agrees that he also would like to see real peace, but it can only be accomplished by teaching it to others, not in forcing it upon them which is why the Templars must be stopped. Ok, I get that. But then as you play through the game you begin to become unsure of what is really real. You find that the war between Assassin and Templar didn't end in the 11th century, it rages on even till this day, and the Templar's have been succeeding. They have effected everything, every authority be it political or religious, history, philosophy, technology, education, and every major event in history, all of it has been shaped by the Templars to keep people from discovering the truth. Then Altiar understands, "Nothing is True, Everything is Permitted," does not mean complete relativism, it means to be wise. As Assassins they must see the world for what it really is, an illusion dominated by Templar influence, and to not be restricted by the powers or expectations or temptations of that illusion. Then as Ezio, the leader of the Assassins 400 years later says "we work in the dark to serve the light."

I find this whole thing so amazing. At first it frustrated me, because as I was growing in my own education I was developing a profound appreciation for written history, first source materials, ancient Christian traditions and Creeds, and this game was basically saying that none of it was trustworthy. The beautiful craft of this series is how they base their story off of real life events and real people and organizations, but have added this conspiracy twist. This makes the atmosphere exciting and suspenseful. In the end it is still relativism, but one desperately searching for truth, untainted and not trying to control you as a slave like the Templars. I found this theme so fascinating, especially now that "Assassin's Creed Revelation" is hinting that it will finally reveal the answers that the Assassin's have been searching for.

I also thought that the game's take on Christianity (and Judaism) was fascinating. The First Assassin's Creed begins with a verse from Ecclesiastes.

"I applied my heart to know wisdom, and to know madness and folly. I perceived that this also was a chasing after wind. For in much wisdom is much grief; and he that increaseth knowledge increaseth sorrow."

Christianity, at least Catholicism, has been infiltrated and dominated by the Templars. The leader of the Templars eventually becomes Pope in Ezio's time, and there is a suspicion that magical artifacts (not God) was responsible for parting the Red Sea, and allowing a simple carpenter to turn water into wine. So Judaism gets mentioned and Christianity gets to play bad guy (sort of).

At the end of both Assassin's Creed 1 + 2 the main character speaks with King Richard and the Pope respectively about the God and Scripture. King Richard prays for wisdom in discerning truth and in the told tells Altiar that even though he doesn't believe in God, God believes in him. Ezio confronts the Templar Pope and as they fight he chastises him for not believing in the Scriptures of his own religion and the Pope laughs at him saying that they are just words that he uses to keep power. Both Christian faith and atheism are presented, but little or no progress is made in resolving an answer.

I found this attempt at being neutral fascinating. I doubt it will be resolved as the explanation of the Assassin's Creed mythos is further explored. The meta-story suggests that Christianity (as well as all other religions) are wrong and that instead of a Biblical creation the world was actually made by advanced alien creatures who became the gods of mythology and that supernatural phenomena is the result of relics of their extremely advanced lost civilization. However, the developers have taken special care to only hint at this and never actually speak against the tenants of a religious group. They have also kept it so that the plausibility / truthfulness of faith (any faith) is presented but left untouched. Old Testament stories, ancient mythologies, and famous pictures / paintings become riddles with hidden meanings in uncovering the Templar plot throughout history. The result is that the Assassins work together for the betterment of humanity in a sort of Gnostic-humanism that respects other religion but doesn't look to any of them for truth. There is also a fair bit of syncratization as one Assassin is a Christian nun who works as the mistress of a brothel. When Ezio questions her about how her faith and her occupation work together she explains that true faith is not restricted by the Church but it between her and God alone. A very fascinating combination of Christian, Assassin, Prostitute, and nun.

My concluding thought in this topic is that real Christianity has not made any appearance in this game and that Christian religiosity is all that we will see in this series. Faith and what religions are actually about / founded in is left nebulous, but not without respect by the Assassins who are far more willing to embrace true faith as opposed to the power crazed Templars. And so black and white becomes shades of grey.

Islam however is left alone completely. I found it odd, since Christianity lended so much of its history and flavor to be reinterpreted that Islam is not picked at like everyone else. My theory is that if anyone was going to be offended and react poorly it would be Islam. Any mention of Muhammad perhaps not being God's prophet would have been blasphemy. Of course hinting that Jesus was only empowered by alien artifacts and was in fact NOT the Son of God is also blasphemy, but Christianity has, for the most part, a different approach these days to non-Christian / multi-faith organizations misrepresenting the God of the universe out of ignorance.

Then there is 'The Truth,' something that you find pieces of throughout Assassin's Creed 2 and Brotherhood. You see, as Desmond is running about through the memories of his ancestors in the machine some of the computer code has peculiarities in it. Someone left him a message and as he finds these 'glitches' in his memory he locates within each one a coded message. The stage is set for exploring just how far the Templars have corrupted all knowledge. You begin to see, just like in the Da Vinci Code, that all sorts of famous artworks and historical photos include relics that the Templars have been using to shape history in their image. Voice recordings, hidden number codes, and riddles begin to unlock the true nature of humanity itself, at least humanity in how UBI has recreated it. Adam and Eve were the first to escape Eden. They took with them a relic, the apple of temptation. They were created in the image of the gods to serve them.

There is so much more I could write about that intrigues me, from the symbolism to the how the game play itself reinforces the story and the messages inherent in it. Perhaps I will conclude with this. At face value the Assassin's Creed series is a long line of bloody assassinations. Search a little deeper and you find a top class conspiracy. Deeper still I think the game asks some incredible questions. How do I know what I've been told is true? How do I know what I believe is true? Is there Truth? Where can I find the Truth? What is the value of a life? As the main characters wrestle through these and other issues for themselves we are taken along for the ride. I think this is a profound tool that ideas are being channeled through today. Young people play these games, encounter the intrinsic ideas of the game they have been participating in, and the messages are heard.

Here are a collection of trailers for the series which give a snapshot of what this is all about.

Assassin's Creed I

Tags: GameTrailers.com, Launch Trailer HD, PC Games, PlayStation 3, Xbox 360

Tags: GameTrailers.com, Exclusive Templar Trailer HD, PC Games, PlayStation 3, Xbox 360

Tags: GameTrailers.com, E3 2K6 Trailer HD, PC Games, PlayStation 3, Xbox 360

Assassin's Creed Lineage (the background of the conspiracy and murder of Ezio's Father)

Tags: GameTrailers.com, Lienage Part 1 HD, PC Games, PlayStation 3, Xbox 360

Tags: GameTrailers.com, Assassin's Creed Lineage 2, PC Games, PlayStation 3, Xbox 360

Tags: GameTrailers.com, Assassin's Creed: Lineage Part 3, PC Games, PlayStation 3, Xbox 360

Assassin's Creed II

Tags: GameTrailers.com, UK Story Teaser HD, PC Games, PlayStation 3, Xbox 360

Tags: GameTrailers.com, Launch Trailer, PC Games, PlayStation 3, Xbox 360

Tags: GameTrailers.com, E3 09: Trailer, PC Games, PlayStation 3, Xbox 360

Tags: GameTrailers.com, Debut Teaser HD, PC Games, PlayStation 3, Xbox 360

Assassin's Creed Brotherhood (2.1)

Tags: GameTrailers.com, Darkness In Rome Trailer HD, PC Games, PlayStation 3, Xbox 360

Tags: GameTrailers.com, E3 2010: Trailer HD, PC Games, PlayStation 3, Xbox 360

Assassin's Creed Revelation (2.2)

Tags: GameTrailers.com, E3 2011: Trailer HD, PC Games, PlayStation 3, Xbox 360

'Over Unionized'

Friday, June 24, In the year of our Lord 2011

Distance Learning Office, Briercrest College

Caronport Saskatchewan

Remembering to post this blog entry, 3:56 PM

Weather = Fantastic! (warm, sunny, not too hot, glorious summer time)

I have been working on and off composing my thoughts on this one. It was ready to post yesterday but I just forgot about it. :p

Unions

Let me begin by saying that I live in an over-unionized province. I think unions can be a very good thing I even think that they should be a very good thing. The logic behind them usually makes sense given the context of their beginnings and that there are very real and serious injustices that they protect against. They can be a very real boon to the economy and culture of a region when done well.

But, as I stated, I live in an over-unionized province and so I face the constant frustration of over-unionization. When is something ‘over-unionized’? When the unions become a detriment more than a help. When the unions firmly fortify division and problems instead of honest hard working people. When unions become too powerful and make outrageous grabs for power and money at the expense of the very people they claim to serve. When unions turn authentic caring people into hardened uncaring economic sink-holes.

If you have ever dealt with or at least talked to anyone who has dealt with a union you will know that the union vs privatization debate can be a very hot and venomous topic. I do not have the experience or wisdom necessary to take a solid stand on either side. Instead I want to voice some of my frustration with over-unionization, not necessarily as a slam against unions, but always in a way to at least make them healthy again. What I see is the pendulum swinging too far one way and I do not want to see it swing too far the other way in response.

So let’s begin.

Note: I don’t claim to know all the issues for particular union actions sited below. I am writing about what I have heard and that information may or may not be accurate.

The first point of frustration I have with over-unionization is that unions will tell their members to go on strike when the members are perfectly happy with the recent offer for better wages / pensions / hours / what have you. Just this last week Canada Post workers went on strike, even though most the members were happy with the deal that the union rejected. The union is making a grab for more money even though the members don’t want to. If the members don’t want to strike and are happy with what they are getting then why has the union called for a strike and would they have called the strike if they didn’t have such a powerful sway over all postal workers for the nation? If the objective becomes to become powerful enough to force companies to give outrageous wages / benefits, more than they can without needing to cut staff, then this is fortifying a problem and just plain irresponsible.

The second point of frustration I have has to do with the crop insurance strike that SGEU decided to pull during the worst flood season in decades. This is very frustrating because it shows that this particular union only cares about its members to the detriment of the society and economy around them and even the public who their members serve. It’s a potent bid for power trying to blackmail companies into a new agreement during a time of crisis. Is the reason for this strike to hammer out much needed reform that has been heading up to a peak over the years or is it what it looks like at face value, a nasty bid for power and money during a time of crisis? Either way, I know a lot of farmers who need that crop insurance, who paid for insurance in good faith, and now there will be none for them. Once again I have also heard that most members didn’t want a strike, but the union called one anyway. Nuff said.

The Third point of frustration I have is best illustrated by the health workers and teachers unions, namely, damaging the field that they dominate. Let’s start with teacher unions. My parents are both teachers so this situation hits close to home. The issue is two pronged, first over-unionization keeps bad teachers teaching and second it makes it extremely difficult for potentially good teachers to enter the system. Since unions are about seniority instead of competence or excellence there are always going to be old teachers (and nurses) who should not hold their profession but always will until they retire. I could write a long section on the horror stories of terrible teachers / nurses who don’t care, who do more damage than good, who are lazy and incompetent, and who get the best position by the sole virtue that they have been their longer than everyone else. You can’t get rid of them, the unions forbid it. When I worked for SGEU as a flag person on the highway I occasionally worked with a man who was lawfully convicted of raping an under-aged girl and had a history of violence. Another fellow showed up for work late, left work early, and depending on the day, didn’t do much work while he was at work or was just plain dangerous to be around because he was drunk with a temper. These people who don’t give a damn about their profession are taking up slots and times for people who want to enter into that occupation who are potentially really good at what they do and could add new life to some stagnant schools / hospitals / businesses / what have you.

Now add to this the fact that the baby boomer generation is retiring. Business is slowing down, which means nobody needs as many workers, which means over populated unions will not be getting new people, which means they are becoming stagnant.

Now, looking specifically at the nurses union, we have a really big problem. Old nurses with lots of seniority get the best shifts, so full hours for them. There is also a nursing shortage, so the demand for nurses is really high. Unfortunately new nurses can only get part time hours because that is all that is available since the old nurses get all the good shifts. So nobody wants to become a nurse here because the hours suck and it won’t pay the bills. The solution that the union came up with was to go on strike and demand a 22% increase. Do I even need to explain how ridiculous and unhelpful this is? Old nurses already make lots and lots of money and they are overworked only because the union demands that they work insane hours to the detriment of their members and of the health care system in general. This is one of the occasions that I will take a stand and saying that I think that the nursing unions need to be broken on this issue because their drive for power (and they are very powerful) and money is damaging health care now and health care in the future. They should not be dissolved, just broken on this issue and reformed to better serve with a human heart instead of a money crank.

Now going back to teachers. Teaching is a noble profession and is absolutely critical for our future. I think teachers (and nurses) should get paid well for what they do. The problem I have was embodied on one of the teacher strike signs that said “better wages = better education.” This is a flat out bold faced fallacy. High wages is proven to encourage laziness and takes away from motivation. The very worst thing that could happen to our education is to have our teachers run on money. I cannot stress this enough. A union of teachers that is cold to the ideals of teaching and the betterment of their students would be the death toll of our nation as we know it. This sort of model is already present in some parts of the States and it is a travesty. Money crank should not be the motivation of teachers unless you want a really really bad education system. I look at other over-unionized teachers unions and I see them shrinking because as the school boards have to pay more and more to teachers the class room sizes get larger and larger and they cannot afford to hire the amount of teachers necessary to keep up. The ideal ratio is somewhere between 7-14 students per 1 teacher… but many teachers are forced to teach classes of 50+. Then they demand higher wages because their job is really hard which ensures that things will always stay the way they are since they can’t afford new teachers. This leads to a host of other issues, an entire other rant all on its own.

I think that this is one instance where unions should either not exist, or at least have much less power. Teaching is not like manual labor where you can outsource it to sweat shops in China or India for really cheap. Teachers should be valued for their skill, not for how many years they’ve put in. The downfall of this method would be when teacher skill is defined by systematized economic results. Sigh… yet another rant on its own. Moving on.

My fourth point of contention has to do with the amount over-unionized workers get paid. This is embodied by the economic recession that really nailed the auto industry in Ontario. I know that losing your job in an economic recession is a really unfortunate situation. These people put in hard work, but I don’t think the amount of money for services rendered is proportionate to the task. (they got paid too much) I don’t think auto-workers should get paid $60 an hour for something that a well-trained monkey could do for bananas. That’s some serious money and it’s no wonder they had to lay off scores of laborers when production fell. Then they have the gall to demand that the government bail them out and the audacity to blame the government for the fall of the industry when they were told to sleep in the bed that they had made for themselves. I know what I would do if I were making $60 an hour in a job that was dependent on the economy and was over unionized… save up for when it all comes crashing down.

Personally, I think the unions have started fighting to retain their territory despite the natural flow of several factors. First of all the Baby Boomers are retiring which has a huge effect on the economy and also raises suspicions about how the unions plan to pay all their pensions. Secondly we have a conservative provincial government and a conservative national government which encourage private business and privatization. Thirdly the effects of being over-unionized for too long erodes public trust to the point where people are more inclined to want privatization. Fourthly, we are already seeing previously unionized territory going out to privatization (thinking specifically of my time working as road crew) because the unions are having trouble supporting themselves. The whole thing is nasty, lots of back stabbing, biting, and visceral going around. Such is the natural way of things, one economic idealist era succeeding another.

There is a war going on in this province. I can see it in the strikes and in the anti-Wall advertisements to stop privatization of information and public parks. I can’t help but think that the unions brought this on themselves for trying to abuse the economy and by not resolving their problems. They are essentially forcing everyone else to not only live with the problems they fortify but also pay for the expensive financial Band-Aid they apply to these problems (higher and higher wages). It seems now that they are even turning against their own members by forcing them to strike when they don’t want to in a vicious bid to stay dominant in a changing economic and political tide. Self-perpetuating problems that only get worse and worse and bigger and bigger. Such a system cannot go on. I think that in order to solve these problems many of the unions will need to break on several issues. Fair isn’t always equal and justice isn’t always fair. In principle most people want fairness and justice, but in practice over-unionized unions want neither.

The Importance of Clear Definitions

Monday, June 20, In the year of our Lord 2011

My House, Caronport Saskatchewan

Heading off to bed, 12:13 AM

Weather outside = wet but warm

A hilarious and unfortunate story came to light as Victoria and I were driving home from my parent's place. It involved the definition of Brother and Sister status. Perhaps some back story is needed to fully appreciate the situation. Victoria and I have been dating since February of this year, but we have liked each other for much longer than that.

This is a love story, so either enjoy or be warned...

Also, it has been posted with Victoria's permission.

I always liked Victoria because I thought that she was a mature and courageous woman with a solid head on her shoulders. My heart always went out to her because she suffers from a chronic illness known as EDS, which makes it so that her joints will dislocate often so that she is in constant pain. I was envious of her ability to ravenously read and manufacture A grade papers while serving as a tech for the school and singing in the Christmas musical. She was an authentic person, kind, caring, wounded, a kindred spirit. Within my first year of meeting her I regarded her as a sister, someone who I had befriended that was very close to me, who could ask anything, who I completely trusted and would do anything for. Victoria adopted several brothers who, like myself had befriended were very close to her, who could ask anything, who she completely trusted and would do anything for. I saw my friendship circle grow in adoption, good friends and brothers of mine became her brothers and I was happy for them. I however never received brother status even though I thought of her as my own sister, but didn't really think anything of it. I just assumed that she had her circle of best friends and that I just wasn't part of that circle, so I would faithfully treat her as a sister from the shadows and stay out of her attention because for a long time I was dating Julie and it wasn't until nearly a year after that relationship ended that I began to get sad about being left out. I figured that I just wasn't worth it and like so many other relationships I had in life, (friendship or otherwise) I was to be the quiet unseen one who cared and worked for the betterment of the other, was never accepted and rarely noticed. (heart throb anyone?)

Victoria on the other hand liked before I liked her but was too scared to say so. To be fair, she wasn't yet in a place where she could. Indeed, she adopted brothers slowly and also sisters, but not me. You see, one thing I didn't understand was that you can adopt brothers and sisters in the sense that you will always seek their good and express a level of deep friendship (which is what I was doing) and that you can adopt brothers and sisters to protect yourself and set up limits by saying that they will only ever be a brother or sister. The reason why she never regarded me as a brother wasn't because I never reached that state of relationship, but because she hoped that I would surpass it and not just be a brother to her. (heart throb anyone?)

Then I started dating Julie and the relationship lasted a good 3 years and Victoria did (in my opinion) an extraordinary brave and selfless thing by respecting my relationship with Julie and wishing us well, while at the same time refusing to relegate me to brother status. After my relationship dissolved one of our good friends (Ian) moved to Caronport and within a few weeks had earned brother status to Victoria. (I also regard him as a brother) He saw how Victoria's other brothers were part of her life but was really confused why I had not received brother status since we knew each other for so long and he had just shown up. Well, he figured it out really quickly and laughed at her. I was still clueless but found myself very interested in spending some time with Victoria while respecting the boundary lines seemed to be in place. (heart throb anyone)

Long story short, we did start dating and it has been awesome! I figured out why I was not a brother, she told me why in February, but I never mentioned, nor even thought about how my definition differed from hers and how that effected how I acted around her. It was only tonight that both sides unfolded and we had a good laugh at the hilarity of the situation. I made her my sister right away because I liked her and was open to further relationship. She did not make me a brother because she really liked me and wanted a deeper relationship. I thought I was no one special to her because I was not considered part of her inner circle of friends (which was never true) and I'm not sure about her, but she might have felt like no one special because I regarded her as a sister!

This situation is absolutely hilarious, the stuff of chick flick romantic movies, except real and unscripted. So there you have it, a love story. Right now the future looks bright and my personal prediction also includes a lot of fun.

God is good.

Greg Out.

Happiness

Saturday June 18, In the year of our Lord 2011

My House, Caronport Saskatchewan

Still waking up, 11:06 AM

Weather = Warm and Green

It occurred to me that only a very few people will be remembered in history. Only a very small percentage will "matter" in the eyes of the world. In Philosophy we have Socrates, Plato, Augustine, Heidegger, Locke, Descartes, and a host of others who will be remembered forever, but the many nameless people who worked along side them have already been forgotten. Great business owners will also be forgotten, even Bill Gates. Nobody remembers or even cares who owned the largest trading enterprise when Egypt, Assyria, Babylon, Persia Phoenicia, Greece, and Rome had their massive empires, nobody will remember or care about ours. Most pastors and church workers will be forgotten in the church except for a few who history has decided to remember; Mother Teresa, Billy Graham, the Wesley Brothers, Calven, Luther, Barth, and a list of Popes.

My thought in all of this is to not even bother trying to be remembered in the world's eyes. You have to do something absolutely incredible and then get really lucky if you want to be remembered, and there are so many countless people who tried, did absolutely incredible things, but are still not remembered today. And what does being remembered do for you? Why would I want to be remembered in the up and coming generations? What good would my legacy be to me or the world?

It also occurred to me that everyone is remembered in Heaven, and that that is where I want to count. Fame and a name in the world is a fleeting thing and it will eventually fade. However, doing Kingdom work for God will endure forever. Perhaps this is part of what Jesus talked about in his parable of the Treasure in the Field or The Pearl of Great Value.

“Do not store up for yourselves treasures on earth, where moths and vermin destroy, and where thieves break in and steal. But store up for yourselves treasures in heaven, where moths and vermin do not destroy, and where thieves do not break in and steal."

So I am motivated to live my life fully and worshipfully towards and caring for other people. There have been countless individuals who have made significant differences in the lives of others and in society that history will never remember, at the very least I want to be one of them. I am glad to help others and make a difference, not only because it matters to them, but because it matters to God. By his grace he has made it so that it also matters to me.

I am happy. I have my own apartment filled with my own stuff. I have a job that I love and a car to go into town. I can make good food for myself, and am making enough money to live well while taking courses. I have good friends close to me, a loving family not too far away, and a fun God honoring meaningful relationship with beautiful woman who is also a friend and an equal. It's finally summer time and I can walk around outside in T-shirt and shorts without fear of frostbite and my town is peaceful, no riots, no gangs, no fear of being robbed or assaulted. I have been incredibly blessed and I am happy.

I seek to work and learn in this time of happiness so that I can serve faithfully and effectively when I'm in the heart of a dark winter and these blessings may be only memory.

Philosophical Nazism in Canada

Thursday, June 9, In the year of our Lord 2011

Briercrest College, Caronport Saskatchewan

Finished this post, 4:14 PM

Weather = Cloudy but warm...ish

I have chipped away at this post every once and a while. I am now posting it.

I was talking with our new Philosophy professor, Jamie Muir, and the topic of the rebellious page in the House of Commons came up. It bothered me a little bit that I do not understand why Brigette DePape did this. I mean, I rationally understand that she has a different view than mine and that she acted on those views, but I don’t understand why she thinks so differently from me. Or, to put it more broadly, why so many people think so differently from each other.

Jamie said that Socrates and his students each came to the same conclusion; that people do not reason to understand but that they reason to affirm what they already believe is true. It’s an interesting concept, one that I can’t disagree with. All people are raised with certain messages and ideas repeated over and over and hailed as true. You never question these ideas; you just accept them on the authority that they are true. So things like human rights, multiculturalism, personal choice, and so on, are just accepted on the basis of authority and we never stop to look at the arguments behind them.

He also said that questioning these unquestioned foundations will usually cause a powerful and negative reaction. If you stop to question whether multiculturalism is a good idea, or dare to voice an opposing argument then society will quickly label you a racist and take action against you. Every society has these unquestioned and unchallenged popular beliefs that you dare not mess with lest the forces that be exile you or worse.

Every idealism group, be they right or left politically, is the same way. They start from unquestioned presuppositions and then filter everything in favor of those presuppositions. Anybody who disagrees with them then just isn’t thinking clearly or is insane. I thought he was joking, but he was not. The reason why so many extreme left or right wing idealists are so smug is because they actually think that everyone who disagrees with them is either stupid or has a mental disorder.

The militant idealists like the same-sex marriage lobby group and many of the women’s studies divisions in Canadian universities will use this this to shape society in how they want it. If you disagree with same-sex marriage then you are a homophobe, you have a mental disorder that creates an irrational bias against gay and lesbian people. If you disagree with feminism then you are a patriarchal chauvinist, you are so backwards and hateful that you need to be re-educated to understand reality, reality as the feminists choose to define it. I have heard stories pretty interesting stories about a specific University that has even started to ban certain literature that disagrees with the Feminist women's studies worldview. They will expel students who disagree with them and sue professors who speak contrary to what they teach. If you believe in God then our good pal Richard Dawkins has written an entire book about how you suffer from a delusion. This is the exact same philosophy and methodology of Nazi Germany and Stalinist Russia, anyone who disagrees with them must be re-educated or put into a mental treatment center. The idea that the unquestioned presuppositions which they agree on could be questioned is unthinkable to them! But they do not start from a position of understanding the world as it is, and that is why they will always fail in the end. Popular presuppositions come and then they go, taking their ideological kingdoms with them.

So that’s all fine and good I guess, but then I started thinking about the church. How often do we do the exact same thing? If someone doesn’t agree with 6 day creation we call them Liberal and say that they need to be re-educated or that they are spiritually blind. How often do we do the exact same thing as the rest of society except in spiritual language? “The devil must have a very strong hold on this nation if even Bible Schools are questioning a literal 6 day creation! Those Liberal schools have gone mad! We need to make laws to ban every viewpoint except the one we have so that our children will never question our unquestionables and everything will stay as we see it.” After all, it’s not God’s truth can stand by itself or that God depends on us to make sure that nobody screws it up (that was sarcasm).

Troubling thoughts, interesting musings. Hmmm…

Not everyone can handle learning how to think freely. For a lot of people, questioning what they have always assumed to be true is a very frightening and even damaging thing that can cause great harm to the person. We all have ideas and concepts that we religiously hold to (regardless of your personal religion) and the possibility that these things not be true will naturally rock the boat more than we want. This is why Plato said that the philosopher should take great care not to harm others.